Influence of Polarity Arrangement of Inter-Wire Arc on Droplet Transfer in Cross-Coupling Arc Welding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to reduce the influence of polar zone effect in cross-coupling arc by changing inter-wire arc (IWA) configuration, the influence of polarity arrangement of the IWA on droplet transfer was studied. The change of voltage-current waveform and the process of droplet transfer were recorded and analyzed by a high-speed camera and electric signal synchronous acquisition system. The results show that when the IWA polarity is arranged as anode on the bottom and cathode on top, the anode spot force always promotes the droplet transfer and reduces the critical current value of spray transfer. However, with the increase in the input voltage of the IWA, the resistance of the cathode spot force becomes obvious, which hinders the droplet transfer. While the IWA polarity is arranged as anode on top and cathode on the bottom, increasing the input voltage of the IWA obviously reduces the plasma arc voltage. The critical current of spray transfer increases in anode droplet, while the cathode droplet is mainly globular transfer, and there is no spatter explosion process. Through a comprehensive comparison of the droplet transfer process of anode and cathode under the different IWA polarity arrangement, the process of anode and cathode in the IWA polarity arrangement of the anode on top and the cathode on the bottom is more stable than that in the IWA polarity arrangement of the anode on the bottom and the cathode on top, mainly because the cathode spot force under high current do not hinder the cathode droplet.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".